tripu
boosted
🇳🇱
@Pat
I cant speak to the previous content you mention as i may have missed it. I seem to recall him saying he was reading mein kampf but that it was not an indication of him supporting the message.
As for the word being harmful in every situation i cant agree, the following woulda be an example where its not harmful: "Shaniqua was called a nigger by a racist today and this is uncalled for, we cant accept that language. I strongly condemn the use of that words towards blacks!". In this context i woukd say not only is not harmful but it is being used positively to condemn racism. As far as i could tell this is more or less the way tripu used it and also the way in which joe roagan used it.
tripu
boosted
I agree with your points, and i think its ashame pat didnt engage with you rather than jumping the gun. I havent seen the videos so incant comment on the full context, but i see no problem with the post of yours i read or your choice to read mein kampf. In fact id say anyone who cares about racism as a social issue should feel an obligation yo read mein kampf. Understanding the things and people we dislike is an important step in addressing those issues.
> _“As to #intent, no one can see into someone else's thoughts to know for sure.”_
Sure. That's why we have the [Principle of #Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) (ie, when in doubt, assume the best intentions in others).
Also, notice that the exact same proposition (“no one can see into someone else's thoughts to know for sure”) would exonerate _me_ from any accusation of #bigotry or lack of sensitivity, since I can't possibly know for sure what other people think, how they will interpret what I say, or how they will feel.
Thus (again): #context, and #PrincipleOfCharity.
5/5
I tag a lot in my toots as a way for my future self to find ideas or conversations. In that context, the fact that I tagged that specific word (too) is meaningless (and I bet @Pat _knew_ that).
4/5
The fact that I did read #MeinKampf is utterly irrelevant here. Anyone can read [my post about it](https://blog.tripu.info/mein-kampf/).
I think dropping in that bare fact like that in our conversation is rather dishonest.
[I did read #TheCommunistManifesto](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1912006087), too. Guess what? I completely disagree with _both_ authors!
Ditto about my previous disagreements with @Pat regarding other topics.
3/5
It's amazing I have to remind anyone in 2022, but **linking to, fav'ing/boosting, or following, something or someone, does _not_ imply complete endorsement of every aspect of that thing or that person**. (Sometimes we even share or highlight precisely for the _opposite_ reason.)
I linked to two videos because I saw something useful in them, in the context of the broader discussion (the #JoeRogan controversy). And no, what I saw useful was not gratuitously chaining utterances of a certain word (that's stupid per se), but:
* that one video showcased that the reaction to Rogan was inconsistent with previous reactions to other public figures committing the same “sin”; and
* that the other video showed that Rogan's views on politics, race, gender, inequality, etc are actually very different from what his critics are saying.
2/5
@Pat and I seem to have basic disagreements about rules of engagement, acceptable speech, and logical reasoning, which we aren't going to solve. We are not going to convince each other. Definitely not when one side is literally blocked by the other. (I absolutely respect his decision to block me.)
For passers-by, and because I keep on feeling implicitly accused of bigotry, lack of sensitivity, or worse: **context and intent matters**. I insist on this because that basic rule keeps resurfacing in the discussion (🧵):
1/5
tripu
boosted
A Spanish fishing boat sunk in the Atlantic. It carried 24 men. Only three survived. Ten died, and eleven are missing (presumably dead too).
In this tragic incident, men are as overrepresented as is mathematically possible. The “gender gap” here would be literally infinite.
This is how the top five Spanish newspaper by circulation (thus with different political views and biases) reported initially the event :
[El Mundo](https://www.elmundo.es/espana/2022/02/15/620b966efc6c83c1648b45b3.html),
[ABC](https://www.abc.es/espana/galicia/abci-varios-muertos-hundirse-barco-gallego-aguas-terranova-202202151242_noticia.html),
[El País](https://elpais.com/espana/2022-02-15/varios-muertos-en-un-naufragio-de-un-pesquero-gallego-en-terranova.html),
[La Vanguardia](https://www.lavanguardia.com/sucesos/20220215/8058385/muertos-hundimiento-barco-gallego-terranova-canada.html),
[20 Minutos](https://www.20minutos.es/noticia/4957129/0/varios-muertos-al-hundirse-un-barco-gallego-con-24-tripulantes-frente-a-la-costa-de-terranova/).
How many times does the word **_“hombre(s)”_ (“man/men”)** appear in the bodies of all the articles, in total? **Zero**. Not a single mention anywhere.
How many times does the word **_“mujer(es)”_ (“woman/women”)** appear? **Three**. Once in _ABC_, twice in _20 Minutos_ (to refer to the wives of two of the fishermen).
How many times the non-gendered word **_“persona(s)”_ (“person(s)”)**? **Ten times**. Non-gendered **_“marinero(s)”_ (“sailor(s)”)**? **17 times**. Non-gendered **_“tripulante(s)”_ (“crew member(s)”)**? **28 times**.
Your homework: find comparable events, statistics, or areas of life where the imbalance is very large (or even just large) against women, and where media coverage uses only non-gendered words or in some other ways leaves out entirely all information about gender composition.
(🇪🇸 #Spain)
Pregunta sincera: si eres de los que llaman a #Vox «ultraderecha» o «derecha radical», pero no consideras que #UnidasPodemos sea «ultraizquierda» ni «izquierda radical», ¿qué criterio sigues para hacer esa distinción? ¿Qué más tendría que proponer #Podemos para que los considerases «ultras», o cuál es el aspecto concreto de Vox que en tu opinión los convierte en «ultras»?
#80000hours is sending a physical #book for free to anyone who subscribes to their newsletter 
tripu
boosted
I have to agree with @tripu and say im rather surprised at @Pat 's response. Trripu used the word to reference what someone said, not directed at anyone and not with harmful intend. Saying someone said the word, and not youtself using the word beyond that context, is an awfully petty thing to block someone over, especially considering he wasnt explicitly condoning its use. Context means everything and when we start ignoring context we cant possibly make progress on any issue.
That said, pat is welcome to block who they want and for any reason. So it is their right to block. But I do think its important to voice my disapproval.
For the record I am speaking as an individual here and not as a moderator.
@Sphinx, @trinsec: about https://qoto.org/@Pat/107805405025437432 , and for context:
https://qoto.org/@tripu/107801777673859261
I used a certain word to refer _to the word itself_ (that's called “metalanguage”), because I wanted to refer to the controversy caused _by someone else_ who in turn used the word — I did not direct the epithet towards any one person or group. My typing the word could not be more removed from the intention of a true racist hurling it at someone.
I am not a US citizen nor resident. English is not even my mother tongue.
Speaking about languages, the word itself is an _alteration_ of a word in my own language, Spanish (_“negro”_) which meant (and still means) literally “black” (that's it, just a colour, no connotations and not taboo for 500+ native speakers).
Whatever responsibility or guilt someone else feels at the mere sight of that word, I am guaranteed to be 100% free of — different continent, different History, that word never been used by my ancestors.
The distance between me using a word in this particular way, and an American white supremacist using it as insult and abuse on purpose, is of cosmic proportions.
All that _has_ to matter, or we are all doomed.
Two very short videos to dismantle the stupid controversy around #JoeRogan, his political views, and the childish taboo around the word #nigger (also: to showcase the benefits of #decentralised, harder-to-censor platforms; in this case #Odysee on top of #LBRY):
The last #episode of the #FreeThoughts #podcast about [what we consider to be “natural” and whether natural is always good or preferable](https://www.libertarianism.org/podcasts/free-thoughts/allure-natural-alan-levinovitz) reminded me of my old #post about #Soylent and about the broader question of #natural vs. artificial:
tripu
boosted
MoviePass “will use facial recognition and eye-tracking technology to ensure that viewers eyes are looking at promoted content in exchange for access to films.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/moviepass-track-eyes-phone-cameras-b2013273.html
May I just say: fuck these people.
